Save Catho!!

Can't find the right forum, then post your general surf-related remarks here!

Moderators: jimmy, collnarra, PeepeelaPew, Butts, beach_defender, Shari, Forum Moderators

User avatar
tootr
Duke Status
Posts: 14669
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 9:50 am
Location: orstrayleeyah

Save Catho!!

Post by tootr » Mon Feb 05, 2007 6:48 am

Ok it isn't my speed to do the soapbox thing but in this case there a HIDEOUS development proposal, which has completly bypassed normal channels by the wonderful Frank Sartor.

Have a look at the attached links and weep!

I'm probably not the only R'surfer who thinks this area is special so help out and fire off some emails

http://www.catherinehillbay.org.au/save ... mpaign.htm

User avatar
chrisb
Owl status
Posts: 4537
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2004 5:45 pm

Post by chrisb » Tue Feb 06, 2007 1:49 pm

I haven't been there for a while but last time I went it hadn't changed that much since the days of "Summer City".

Iv'e always liked the place but I wonder how much of the protest is "NIMBY" based ?

How do we balance the rights of the locals who want it remain unchanged v the outsiders who would like to live there but can't because there's no accommodation.

wambie ripper
Grommet
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 7:34 pm
Location: central coast
Contact:

Post by wambie ripper » Tue Feb 06, 2007 6:01 pm

^^^^^^^^^^

good pint i strongly agree that no local will hve to give up his view or peace and quiet for new development.
The only time "outsiders" should be allowed to move in is if a pre- existing house is already built.
People should move to more developing areas rather than ruin nice established communities.

and no-one wants a crowded line-up!

User avatar
Shaunm
Snowy McAllister
Posts: 9400
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2004 2:30 pm
Location: Manly Lagoon

Post by Shaunm » Tue Feb 06, 2007 6:17 pm

It's been happening for over 200 years now, and no knowing where it will (IF) it will stop. The farm lands near me over the gorge are being snapped up by developers and Arcadia is set to become the next Kellyville as the state govt is trying to rezone it. Medium/high density low cost housing :twisted: ploy to get more ALP voters into a never before been ALP electorate I reckon.

User avatar
tootr
Duke Status
Posts: 14669
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 9:50 am
Location: orstrayleeyah

Post by tootr » Tue Feb 06, 2007 7:28 pm

some fair points guys but when the proposal in for close to 1000, yes, 1000 medium density dwellings and the two local councils have kiboshed on the basis of lack of proximity to essential infrastructure, and then frank sartor takes control, it smells more than a little, especially since the developer is a major $ donor to labour party

and there ain't no land shortage in the upper central coast either

User avatar
austeve
regular
Posts: 309
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 8:05 am
Location: central coast

Post by austeve » Tue Feb 06, 2007 7:41 pm

There is no shortage of land but what about the fact that water is at all time lows & dam level for both dams on the coast are at around 14%.How the f*$k is another 1000 families going to help solve that problem :evil:

User avatar
Boozer
barnacle
Posts: 1310
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2005 10:32 pm

Post by Boozer » Tue Feb 06, 2007 7:48 pm

wambie ripper wrote:good pint i strongly agree that no local will hve to give up his view or peace and quiet
That's not what they said that last time I was up there with our local footy team. The pub went off all weekend.

It's a travesty. I had hoped that this had been properly dealt with before. Until........

The government is supposed to have a platform of protecting the NSW coast from irresponsible development.

Catho should be heritage listed as a classic example of a NSW coastal village at it's best.

locomotive
Grommet
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 1:21 am
Location: somewhere hollow
Contact:

Post by locomotive » Tue Feb 06, 2007 9:14 pm

It's very important.

User avatar
boogaloo
Local
Posts: 624
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:31 pm
Location: Poontang Gully

Post by boogaloo » Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:19 pm

chrisb wrote:How do we balance the rights of the locals who want it remain unchanged v the outsiders who would like to live there but can't because there's no accommodation.
wambie ripper wrote:... i strongly agree that no local will hve to give up his view or peace and quiet for new development ...
I like quiet, unspoiled places. Frank Sartor is a complete arsehole. The NSW Labor Party are developer-sucking scum.

BUT

Nobody has a 'right' to have their environment remain unchaged. A title to a piece of real estate does not entitle the owner to a view, or peace and quiet, or having no developments nearby that they don't like.

bonusbeats
Local
Posts: 533
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 11:51 am
Location: southern beaches

Post by bonusbeats » Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:35 pm

our public institutions are corrupt.
this isn't about issues like the rights of individuals vs the community or appropriate development or anythng else other than.....show me the money!

User avatar
bc
charger
Posts: 780
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2004 12:41 pm
Location: Redfern Shores

Post by bc » Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:46 am


User avatar
tootr
Duke Status
Posts: 14669
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 9:50 am
Location: orstrayleeyah

Post by tootr » Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:13 am

thanks for that link BC

highlights very nicely the grubby situation!!


PS written some emails folks? (see link at top of thread?

warnevale warrior
newbie
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 10:23 am
Location: in the water

Post by warnevale warrior » Wed Feb 07, 2007 8:33 am

If you don't like what Mr Sartor is doing, remember to vote them out on March 24 - although who knows who would do a better job

bonusbeats
Local
Posts: 533
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 11:51 am
Location: southern beaches

Post by bonusbeats » Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:13 am

warnevale warrior wrote:If you don't like what Mr Sartor is doing, remember to vote them out on March 24 - although who knows who would do a better job
they'll both do an appalling job. neither party has any interest in scaling back real estate development. as 'south park' pointed out - it's a choice between a douche bag and a turd sandwich.

User avatar
stinky_wes
regular
Posts: 367
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 3:06 pm
Location: anywhere without a crowd

Post by stinky_wes » Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:47 am

Giant Douche vs Turd Sandwich... Classic episode.

I have been surfing Catho and surrounds every few weeks for the last 3-4 years. It is one of the nicest places to have a quiet surf, usually by yourself, then spend the afternoon at the pub with all the bikies, or head over to the bowling club to play a few ends and eat some lunch.

The locals are generally quiet and keep amongst themselves, as if they are oblivious to the world going on around them. They enjoy living somewhere that is unique, and are not very happy about the current proposals, to say the least. They have been fighting developments in the area for a couple of decades now, but it seems that the corporate bigwigs have gotten it over them this time.

The development will destroy this town, and instead turn it into another crappy "Sydney-esque" coastal town.

See 'Magenta Shores' for an example of one of these abominations, which also happens to be plonked right in the middle of a small national park and is surrounded by a couple of very fragile and important ecosytems/environments

Send in letters to those responsible via the addresses provided in the link on Tootr's post (at the top of the page). Let them know that this type of development isn't appropriate for this region.


It will be a very sad day if this proceeds....

User avatar
Spoon
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 4095
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 9:43 am
Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney

Post by Spoon » Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:08 pm

It should be heritage listed and left alone in a perfect world. It is a lovely spot which we have gone on and off for over 25 years. I am amazed that it has remained as it is for so long being so close to Sydney. I am also concerned that they will do to it what they have done to Lennox and Kiama/Bombo which turns into Kellyville on the coast. I will certainly sending in an email voicing my dissapproval.

Beanpole
That's Not Believable
Posts: 68920
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 8:21 am
Location: Button Factory

Post by Beanpole » Wed Feb 07, 2007 3:47 pm

I've driven through twice recently after not going through it for probably 20 years and the only change that I was annoyed at was they've stopped road access to the back beach.

Personally, the place has always given me the kreeps and I reckon the beach is bloody ordinary except for the novelty value of the pier and seeing blocks of coal on the beach plus points south. The bikers can have the pub to themselves.

Real deliverance country. :x :x :x :x :x

User avatar
tootr
Duke Status
Posts: 14669
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 9:50 am
Location: orstrayleeyah

Post by tootr » Wed Feb 07, 2007 4:11 pm

Beanpole wrote:I've driven through twice recently after not going through it for probably 20 years and the only change that I was annoyed at was they've stopped road access to the back beach.

Personally, the place has always given me the kreeps and I reckon the beach is bloody ordinary except for the novelty value of the pier and seeing blocks of coal on the beach plus points south. The bikers can have the pub to themselves.

Real deliverance country. :x :x :x :x :x
that is your opinion beany and you are certainly entitled to it, but more importantly there is a principle here and that is simply to take some action before developers turn the rest of our coastline into a brick veneered high density toilet

enough coastline is stuffed !

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 42 guests